Friday, 29 July 2005

UPDATE, THE SECOND: Now our glorious police have killed a Grandmother, accidentally of course but that's what you get when you MANHANDLE A 74 YEAR OLD WOMAN. Two women and a 12 year old boy harrassed by police to the extent that one of them dies. Has our constabulary lost all sense of reason? How the hell could they think that these people were a threat? What the FUCK is happening to this country? Has everyone gone stark-staring bonkers???

This is just great, the controls of the fascist police state are complete. You can now get shot for being suspected of being a suicide bomber. We have one innocent Brazillian dead and now many more could be shot for no reason whatsoever. This government is totally out of control, am I the only one who can see that? This is no longer a democracy, this is a police state where you can be shot for wearing a big jacket and sprinting for the train.

But then our police were trained in Israel so what the hell do you expect!?

Police have been given permission to shoot dead suspected suicide bombers without any verbal warning, the Guardian has learned.

The killing of an innocent Brazilian man in a London underground station on Friday has focused attention on new guidelines to defend against terror attacks.

Operation Kratos tactics say suicide bombers who are about to explode their devices can be shot in the head.

There is still confusion over whether Jean Charles de Menezes, who was shot eight times, received a verbal warning.

A police source has told the Guardian that there is no need for officers to verbally warn a suspect before opening fire.

The source said: "If the firearms team are reasonably certain the person is a suicide bomber then there is no need to issue any warning.

"Experience from other parts of the world shows that if a suicide bomber knows they are being followed by police, they will detonate."

Yesterday, Barbara Wilding, the chief constable of South Wales police and one of the architects of the shoot-to-kill policy, said old guidelines telling officers to fire at the upper chest were redundant in the face of the dangers posed by suicide bombers.

She told the BBC that criminal law still governed officers' actions: "We always have to be able to answer, have we used reasonable force in the light of intelligence of the situation and the risk?"

The Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said there had been 250 incidents since the attacks when police thought they may have been dealing with a suicide bomber. And he indicated that on seven occasions police had been on the brink of acting.

"I know there have been 250 incidents since July 7 where we have considered whether we are seeing a suicide bomber," he said. "I know that when I last saw it there had been seven times when we have got as close to calling it as 'that' and we haven't."

More rumours circulating about WMD terrorism and a subsequent invasion of Iran, let's hope that rumours are all they are...

Jesse's Blog

Some rumors eventually prove to be accurate foreknowledge. I hope that this one turns out to be silly paranoia spawned by someone (me) who gets too much email and worries too much!

We hear it every day from our government officials: “It’s not a matter of if, but when!” This phrase of course referrers to the domestic nuclear terrorism that our government tells us in inevitable. Naturally when our our government tells us this we have to respect their words. But when similar information is sourced to independent media the “conspiracy theory” tag is immediately applied. Let’s all hope that we can look back at this note and tag it as well meaning alarm and not as foreknowledge.

Before I fill you in on the information rumor mill regarding supposed upcoming nuclear terror let’s keep a few things in mind:

1. The US government is warning us that a nuclear terrorists attack is imminent. It is just a matter of time.2. Nuclear weapons have only been manufactured by governments; with the US government being the most prolific producer.3. The above 2 facts should lead you to realize that nuclear weapons do not get used without some kind of government involvement. Governments are the only entities that have the ability to manufacture nuclear weapons and they have always been in complete control of these weapons.4. The fact is that no nuclear device has or will ever go off without the knowledge of at least one government that has a nuclear weapons program. We all know about the official nuclear capable nations and we all know that Israel is the unofficial nation to have nuclear capabilities. What is taking place, as was the case with Iraq, is that Iran is being set up as a nuclear threat in the event of a nuclear terror incident. Iran is not a nuclear WMD producer and if they were their technology would be so primitive that they would not be able to produce a small nuclear device that can be delivered by a terrorist. Nations do not jump from having no nuclear capabilities to producing the state of the art miniature nuclear devices. It just does not happen. Only the Soviet Union, the US and Israel would have that capability at this time. Perhaps some of the other nuclear nations can produce such devices but it is unlikely. What is surely unlikely is that Iran can produce them. Keep that in mind.

In an analysis titled "Threat to the U.K. from International Terrorism" posted on the agency's Web site, a team of MI5 analysts concludes, "Though they have a range of aspirations and 'causes,' Iraq is a dominant issue for a range of extremist groups and individuals in the U.K. and Europe."

In the wake of the July 7 bombings Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and Prime Minister Tony Blair insisted there was no link between Britain's role in the Iraq invasion and the attacks. Their views came in contrast to a leaked assessment by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center, based at MI5, which claimed three weeks before July 7 that Iraq was continuing to act "as a focus of a range of terrorist related activities in Britain."

Blair has since acknowledged that terrorists may use Iraq for recruitment.

In their analysis, the MI5 officers add: "Some individuals who support the insurgency are known to have traveled to Iraq in order to fight against coalition forces. It is possible that they may return to the U.K. and consider mounting attacks here."

Thursday, 28 July 2005

I don't think Phony Tony has any, he's sold his soul for whatever it was he sold it for and with it he sold us out, he knows it and he's scared that everyone else will find out too... Tony is a scar on the conscience of this country.

9/11. 3/11. Then 7/7. On July 7th, 2005, 4 bombers murdered 52 Britons (and themselves) and injured over 700 hundred more. In response, British Prime Minister Tony appeared on television, pledging to defend "our values" and "our way of life," saying "It is important that the terrorists realize our determination to defend our values and our way of life... It is our determination that they will never succeed in destroying what we have here in this country and in other civilized countries around the world," and offered the typical Bushian mantra of "us vs. them" – a perverted world-view that is indistinguishable from Bush's and a steady recipe for perpetual conflict and misunderstanding.

As one blogger said it best, "Even by Blair's standards, it was a performance of nauseating hypocrisy, as he sought to seize the moral high ground in relation to [the] violence and destruction that he himself helped unleash."

On Monday, July 11, Blair refused the lickspittle Conservative "opposition’s" demands for a government inquiry into the bombings, insisting, following Dick Cheney’s lead, that an investigation into his regime’s failures would distract from the task of catching the perpetrators, and announced that he believed an inquiry into the bombings would be a "ludicrous diversion."

In response to the bombings, several people drew the obvious link between Blair’s participation in the war crime of invading Iraq and the blowback of revenge killings in Britain, just as it had in Spain. George Galloway, who brought both barrels to his appearance before the sham investigation into the embargo on Iraq and allegations of bribery with illegal oil sales, issued a statement that in part read:

"We have worked without rest to remove the causes of such violence from our world. We argued, as did the Security Services in this country, that the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq would increase the threat of terrorist attack in Britain. Tragically Londoners have now paid the price of the government ignoring such warnings. We urge the government to remove people in this country from harms way, as the Spanish government acted to remove its people from harm, by ending the occupation of Iraq and by turning its full attention to the development of a real solution to the wider conflicts in the Middle East."

Liberal Democratic party leader Charles Kennedy made the obvious observation when he remarked: "Those, like President Bush and Tony Blair, who have sought to link Iraq with the so-called 'war on terror' can hardly be surprised when members of the public draw the same link when acts of terrorism occur here in the United Kingdom."

Charles Kennedy spoke for many when he stated the obvious, that the Iraq War gave Jihadists a popular recruiting cause, a training ground and further reasons to try to strike the West.

Even Blair's former Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, saw the link: "There may be room for debate over whether there is a connection between the war in Iraq and the London bombings, but there is no escaping the hard truth that the chain in that country is a direct result of the decision to invade it," he told the Guardian.

London Mayor Red Ken Livingston offered these uncharacteristically wise for him, comments on the bombings, when asked what he thought motivated the attacks:

"I think you've just had 80 years of western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of the western need for oil. We've propped up unsavory governments, we've overthrown ones we didn't consider sympathetic. And I think the particular problem we have at the moment is that in the 1980s ... the Americans recruited and trained Osama Bin Laden, taught him how to kill, to make bombs, and set him off to kill the Russians and drive them out of Afghanistan. They didn't give any thought to the fact that once he'd done that he might turn on his creators … If at the end of the First World War we had done what we promised the Arabs, which was to let them be free and have their own governments, and kept out of Arab affairs, and just bought their oil, rather than feeling we had to control the flow of oil, I suspect this wouldn't have arisen."

However, to admit that his actions precipitated the events would be a repudiation of Tony Blair’s entire post 9-11 career. So, naturally, he did what comes naturally to every politician. He ignored reality. Unfortunately for the fatuous Blair, along came the ICM poll published in the Guardian newspaper. With a margin of error of 3 percentage points, the poll found that 33 percent of Britons said that Tony Blair himself bore "a lot of responsibility" for the bombings, and 31 percent thought he had "a little" responsibility.

In response to the poll Blair snorted: "Of course these terrorists will use Iraq as an excuse. They will use Afghanistan. Sept. 11 happened of course before both of these things, and then the excuse was American policy, or Israel. They will always have their reasons for acting. But we have got to be really careful of almost giving in to the perverted and twisted logic with which they argue."

Perverted and twisted logic. Yes, let’s not give into that. Let’s deny all the evidence. Like the repeated claims by Al-Qaeda and it’s imitators that they are acting to frustrate and repulse the decades long Anglo-American imperialism in the Arab world and now the installation of a new Anglo-American condominium over the Muslim world under the cover of "democratically-elected" puppet regimes to deflect widespread and rising hostility to their allied military despots and domestic sympathizers. Let’s ignore cause and effect and continue to insist on illogical and perverted explanations that purely by coincidence, I’m sure, continue to justify continued imperialism and it’s expansion into new lands in the futile search for a military solution to a political tactic.

If as Tony Blair and George W. Bush say, the terrorists strike out to destroy Western values and societies, why have they not bombed Portugal, which is very similar to Spain? Why not Switzerland and Sweden? Austria and Germany? Canada, Brazil, France, Mexico, Greece and any other Western countries? Why do they continue to attack countries that are occupied by inhumane regimes that participated in the invasion of Iraq and the continued occupation of the Arab world through proxy despotisms? Unfortunately, for Blair, he conveniently forgets that Al-Qaeda has repeatedly cited the pre-9/11 U.S. occupation of Arabia and the embargo of Iraq as the reason for their attacks on 9/11 and the Madrid bombers openly cited Spanish participation in the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

Did the IRA commit their bombings, including an attack on Downing Street itself, because they hated the English way of life and English values or did they hate the government’s policy of occupying Northern Ireland? Could it be that just as one earlier occupation of a neighboring land produced terror on British soil, another occupation of a distant land has produced terror again.

It's not just the Muslim community that has its doubts. British people know that their government is basically run by a bunch of scalliwags and hooligans, what they don't yet understand is the extent to which the government is guilty of deceiving all of us. Look at all the dirty little "official" secrets there are in Whitehall and then try and tell me they are squeaky clean. Nope, I'm standing up right here and right now and saying that I don't think Muslims had anything more to do with it than the role of pawns on a chessboard. The media is being led by the hoof, we don't NEED government censorship because the profession of journalism teaches them how to censor themselves! Any who don't are ostracised or branded "conspiracy theorists" and subsequently sacked then left homeless and hungry. As far as the London Bombings goes, the key is to find out WHO the chessmasters REALLY are. Find them and then hang them from Tower Bridge after they've been found guilty of the High Treason that they most certainly are guilty of.

Mohammed Naseem, Birmingham's most prominent Muslim leader, claimed yesterday there was nothing to prove Muslims carried out bomb attacks in London on July 7 and 21.

The comments of the chairman of Birmingham Central Mosque are surprising given the wealth of evidence, including DNA matches and CCTV images, linking at least eight young Muslim men to the outrages.

However, his views are held by a significant number of British Muslims. Some blame the US and Israel for terrorist attacks such as September 11, revealing a deep distrust of the British authorities.

Mr Naseem denied there was any convincing evidence the September 11 attacks on New York had been carried out by the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation. He said: “Muslims across the world know of no organisation called al-Qaeda. That information comes from the CIA.”

Mr Naseem, who represents a congregation of several thousand, was speaking in Bordesley Green close to the scene of yesterday's police anti-terrorism operation. Asked whether he believed Muslim terrorists attacked London on July 7 and 21, he said: “I have not seen the evidence for that.” He said: “All we have is CCTV camera photos, identity cards and driving licences. These could have been innocent men.”

Talib Hussain, a representative of Birmingham council who was also present, said: “Certain faith groups have been identified as being behind [the bombings] and that is wrong.” Mr Naseem said Muslims had lost faith in anti-terrorist police and the security services.

Since the Friday shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent man with no links to terrorism or suicide bombers, we have been subjected to further spin and misdirection in an attempt to stifle real questions about the 7/7 bombing.

The original bombing story has been permanently removed from the front pages of the nation's newspapers. Publications like the London Mirror were starting to ask serious questions about how the alleged bombers were set up by another group and were unaware of the fact that they would be killed in the blasts.

As this website has consistently claimed, the 7/7 alleged bombers were hired as the unwitting fall guys for an operation of which the planning and execution was organized at the very highest levels of the parallel British government.

The dupes were told they were part of a drill to test security provisions in dealing with suicide bombers. The men booked return tickets, pay and display tickets for their cars, expected to be paid handsomely and to have helped protect their country before returning to their homes in Leeds.

We received an interesting e mail from an individual who was listening to BBC Radio Five on the day of the bombings.

I thought I'd follow up on what you've obviously been getting from England regarding the recruitment of volunteers for terror drills. I heard the same thing with a notable differnce. I heard this on BBC Radio 5 Live on 7/7.

My honest recollection is that it was broadcast somewhere around lunchtime. They mentioned that Transport for London (the people running the underground) in conjunction with the Dept. of Transport would run drills where fake devices would be placed on the network and the staff reponse times measured in terms of locating them.

To the best of my re-collection they did not really elaborate any further on this, but the shock I felt was real when I started to think 9/11 and the CIA, NRO planes as weapons wargames and the USAF's hi-jack field training exercises.

Please note also that the Sky News Foreign News Editor Tim Marshall reported seeing British Army soldiers/bomb disposal people in the Charing Cross area at around 1100 - 1115 hours. When his interview (by mobile phone) was over the news anchor read a brief Army statement "...Civil Contingency Support Measures are now in place".

The anchorman then said "...Army on the streets of London trying to manage this major terrorist situation."

The time was 1118 hours when said this.

Other websites have also echoed claims that Muslims were being recruited for drills on the London Underground.

Of course the biggest smoking gun of them all is the fact that there was a drill at the exact same time targeting the exact same locations in the London Underground.

Channel 4 News attempted to dismiss our investigation into this by claiming that it was an inquest that was only relevent up until the identity of the 'bombers' was made public. This is plainly a ridiculous claim. Just because some grainy CCTV footage of four men is released does not make an event that has been calculated to be an astronomically impossible coincidence irrelevent. Furthermore, the fact that the four men pictured were on the scene at the time of the bombings does not mean that the exercise is unrelated. In fact, from the very start we have consistently emphasized the fact that the alleged bombers and the exercise are directly related.

Yet more evidence as to the bombers' unwitting role in the horrific reality of the attack has emerged.

Eyewitness Bruce Lait was yards away from the bomb that exploded at Aldgate East station. The following is what he told the Cambridge Evening News.

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag."

For individuals to plant bombs underneath trains and secure them in place without being caught, they would need to secure access to the trains. In this scenario, London Underground could have been told that a dummy device was to be placed underneath the train as part of an exercise to test security an alertness. When the real attacks happened some LU officials would have been alarmed but their suspicions would have dampened when it was revealed that the bombs were carried in backpacks, meaning that the drill was just a strange 'coincidence'.

The fact that the bombs were actually planted underneath the trains could have easily been buried in an avalanche of official announcements to the contrary.

On the other hand the backback bombs could have just been the diversionary blasts to enable patsies to be framed, just like the planes flying into the towers acted as the diversionary cover for the explosives planted inside the WorldTrade Center.

The 7/21 copycat bombings have succeeded in monopolizing media coverage and taking attention away from the highly suspicious 7/7 bombings. The fact that all four bombings were badly planned and failed suggests that there was no inside involvement.

Ok, so why the hell was this poor guy shot? They let him get on a bus thinking he was a suicide bomber and then shot him before he got on a tube train. They say he had a big jacket on: he didn't. They say he vaulted the barrier: he didn't. The wrestled him to the ground and unloaded an entire magazine into him based on the fact that he came out of a building that had a flat in it that was once occupied by someone connected to the bombings. Now it turns out most of what they told us was bollocks anyway. Any talk of the officers concerned being sanctioned? Any reprimands? ANY FUCKING JAIL SENTENCES??? NO! Why? Because in the words of the immortal Bantu Stephen Biko "The System will never convict The System."

These are the actions of a fascist police state, not one of the world's oldest democracies! Wake the fuck up people!

Jean Charles de Menezes, the Brazilian shot dead in the head, was not wearing a heavy jacket that might have concealed a bomb, and did not jump the ticket barrier when challenged by armed plainclothes police, his cousin said yesterday.

Speaking at a press conference after a meeting with the Metropolitan police, Vivien Figueiredo, 22, said that the first reports of how her 27-year-old cousin had come to be killed in mistake for a suicide bomber on Friday at Stockwell tube station were wrong.

Article continues"He used a travel card," she said. "He had no bulky jacket, he was wearing a jeans jacket. But even if he was wearing a bulky jacket that wouldn't be an excuse to kill him."

Flanked by the de Menezes family's solicitor, Gareth Peirce, and by Bianca Jagger, the anti-Iraq war campaigner, she condemned the shoot-to-kill policy which had led to her cousin's death and vowed that what she called the "crime" would not go unpunished.

"My cousin was an honest and hard working person," said Ms Figueiredo who shared a flat with him in Tulse Hill, south London. "Although we are living in circumstances similar to a war, we should not be exterminating people unjustly."

Another cousin, Patricia da Silva Armani, 21, said he was in Britain legally to work and study, giving him no reason to fear the police. "An innocent man has been killed as though he was a terrorist," she said. "An incredibly grave error was committed by the British police."

Mr de Menezes was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder at 10am last Friday after being followed from Tulse Hill. Scotland Yard initially claimed he wore a bulky jacket and jumped the barrier when police identified themselves and ordered him to stop. The same day the Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said the shooting was "directly linked" to the unprecedented anti-terror operation on London's streets.

The following day Sir Ian apologised when detectives established that the Brazilian electrician, on his way to a job in north-west London, was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission has began an inquiry which is expected to take several months. Yesterday it emerged one armed officer involved has been given leave, and two have been moved to non-firearm duties. Ms Figuerdo condemned Sir Ian's decision to authorise the leave, saying she wanted to see the man who shot her cousin, and he should be in jail.

The body of Mr de Menezes is being flown to Brazil tonight for a funeral tomorrow. Simultaneously, a memorial service will be held at Westminster Cathedral, with TV coverage beamed live to Brazil.

Ms Peirce condemned Sir Ian's statements on the case, saying there had been a "regrettable rush to judgment".

Tuesday, 26 July 2005

These stories should all be taken in the context of Joe Vialls' theories about Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman. I am one of the few people in the UK who still does not believe that Ian Huntley and Maxine Carr are guilty. If you're interested read the codshit coverage of the Soham murders linked below.

Data is emerging, no matter how the administration attempts to hide it, that the new photos and video of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison include the torture of children.

Norway's Prime Minister's office says it plans to address the situation with the U.S. "in a very severe and direct way."

Could this mean losing yet another ally in the Iraq occupation? Amnesty International in Norway has said that Norway can no longer continue their occupation of Iraq, or their support of US policy in this matter.

And some countries, as Tom Tomorrow notes, actually listen to their activists.

While there isn't even an inkling of this in the US Mainstream media, all over the world people are beginning to read about the US abusing children at Abu Ghraib.

Der Spiegel

The Sunday Herald in Scotland has a piece on the abuse of children at the notorious prison:

From Iraq's Child Prisoners, written one year ago:

It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.

A DailyKos diarist has artist renditions of the abuse of a little girl being shown in magazines across the world.

So, our glorious police let him get on a bus thinking he might be a suicide bomber. There are doubts about the verbal warning given, one witness reports hearing no warning. Now we find out that the pigs emptied an entire magazine into him after after pinning him to the ground. Great job guys! Super, splendid bit of police-work there! The armed bacon at the station makes me feel so much better knowing that they could shoot me for sprinting to catch my train!

Inquiry by police complaints authority to look at all ranks involved, including those who gave orders

Jean Charles de Menezes, the innocent Brazilian man killed by police after being mistaken for a suicide bomber, was shot eight times at Stockwell Tube station on Friday, not five times as had previously been reported.

The details of the number of rounds emptied into the 27-year-old Brazilian electrician after his pursuit through Stockwell station by an armed plainclothes squad emerged at the opening of an inquest into his death yesterday.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission also began an inquiry into the shooting yesterday.

The commission's chairman, Nick Hardwick, told the Guardian the investigation would look at "officers of all ranks", potentially including those who authorised special shoot-to-kill tactics against suicide bombers.

Mr Hardwick said: "It would be wrong to look at people [just] on the frontline, you have to look at who gave the orders and who is in the chain of command."

He added he was confident of getting access to all police documents and personnel involved.

Southwark coroner's court heard that Mr De Menezes, who arrived in Britain three years ago on a student visa, had been on the way to a job in Kilburn, north-west London, when he was challenged and pursued by armed police. He was shot seven times in the head and once in the shoulder.

Witnesses to the shooting last Friday spoke of hearing five shots.

The Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, had initially said the shooting was "directly linked" to anti-terror operations. But detectives later established he was not connected to attempts to blow up three underground trains and a bus in the capital the day before.

At a Downing Street news conference yesterday Tony Blair said he was "desperately sorry" for the death of Mr De Menezes but that police were working in very difficult circumstances.

"I think it is important that we give them every support and that we understand that had the circumstances been different and, for example, this had turned out to be a terrorist and they had failed to take that action, they would have been criticised the other way," he said.

"At the same time therefore, in expressing our sorrow and deep sympathy for the death that has happened, it is important that we allow the police and support them in doing the job they have to do in order to protect people in this country."

The prime minister's apology came amid conflicting reports on whether Mr De Menezes' student visa, which allows people to work for a small number of hours, had expired, hence his failure to stop when challenged by police. The Home Office said it was unable to comment on the claims, which were reported by the BBC yesterday and attributed to security sources. Normally, a student visa would expire within two years.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of human rights organisation Liberty, said she was "disgusted" by the suggestion that someone's immigration status might have any relevance to the value of their life, adding that Liberty had been at pains to reserve judgment on the Stockwell shooting pending the outcome of an independent investigation.

Monday, 25 July 2005

I am so angry about this, every time I see the news reports I can feel my blood boiling. An innocent man is dead! What I want to know is if this poor guy was such a threat, why the FUCK did those murderous bastards in the police let him get on a fucking bus at Tulse Hill and travel to Stockwell before deciding to pump 5 shots into him?! Why did they pin him down and then shoot him, surely they had him restrained. Why did a witness not hear the police warning Jean that they were armed police? The whole thing stinks of incompetance! Reports say the family is suing the police, good! I hope they win a very large amount of money!

Public opinion over the police's controversial shoot-to-kill policy has wavered dramatically since an innocent man was shot dead in London last Friday.

Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, a Brazilian electrician on his way to work, was shot by police as he tried to get on a train at Stockwell Tube station on Friday.

He had been followed from a block of flats which was under surveillance, but he turned out to have no connection to terrorism.

A poll on the Mail online on Friday and Saturday showed that 84 per cent of readers were in favour of the shoot-to-kill policy in respect of suspected suicide bombers, compared with 16 per cent against.

But a second poll started on Sunday showed a dramatic swing in opinion. At 10.30am on Monday, only 68 per cent of readers were in favour of the policy, compared with 32 per cent against.

If you ask me Dick Cheney is Evil Incarnate, anyone that voted against the imposition of sanctions on Apartheid South Africa is a fascist!

Stand athwart the apocalypse, and shout: "No!"

by Justin Raimondo

A recent poll shows six in ten Americans think a new world war is coming: the same poll says about 50 percent approve of the dropping of the atomic bomb on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II. Somewhat inexplicably, about two-thirds say nuking those two cities was "unavoidable." One can only wonder, then, what their reaction will be to this ominous news, revealed in a recent issue of The American Conservative by intelligence analyst Philip Giraldi:

"The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing – that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack – but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections."

Two points leap out at the reader – or, at least, this reader – quite apart from the moral implications of dropping nukes on Iran. The first is the completely skewed logic: if Iran has nothing to do with 9/11-II, then why target Tehran? As in Iraq, it's all a pretext: only this time, the plan is to use nuclear weapons. We'll wipe out the entire population of Iran's capital city because, as Paul Wolfowitz said in another context, "it's doable."

The other weird aspect of this "nuke Iran" story is the triggering mechanism: a terrorist attack in the U.S. on the scale of 9/11. While it is certain that our government has developed a number of scenarios for post-attack action, one has to wonder: why develop this plan at this particular moment? What aren't they telling us?

I shudder to think about it.

The more I look at it, and the more I think of it, the more I sense a monumental evil casting its shadow over the world, and I have to tell you, it makes me wonder how much more time I want to spend on this earth. In my more pessimistic moments, I doubt whether we can avoid the horrific fate that seems to await us just around the next corner, the next moment, looming over the globe like a gigantic devil stretching its wings and blotting out the sun.

It seems to me that the question of whether life is really worth living anymore is inextricably bound up with the question of whether or not these madmen can be stopped. If not, then the only alternative is to live it up while we can and laugh defiantly in the face of the apocalypse. Why write columns, why comment at all, if we can't have any effect on the outcome? On the other hand, some ask

"Surely the New York Times and the Washington Post can find a lede here: 'US has plan to nuke Tehran if another 9/11.' Can we get at least a bloody story out of this?"

Might I suggest another lede?: "Armageddon approaches." Or perhaps, for the literary-mind secularists among us: "After many a summer dies mankind."

Where oh where is the "mainstream" media on this? That's a laughable question, because the answer is heartbreakingly obvious: they are nowhere to be found, and for a very good reason. As the Valerie Plame case is making all too clear, the MSM has been a weapon in the hands of the War Party at every step on the road to World War IV. It's an American tradition. As William Randolph Hearst famously put it to an employee in the run-up to the Spanish-American conflict of 1898:

"You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war."

Any objective examination of the Anglo-American media's role as a megaphone for this administration's "talking points" would have to conclude that the Hearst school of journalism has been dominant since well before the invasion of Iraq. Aside from the post-9/11 hysteria that effectively swept away all pretenses of a critical stance, the MSM was well acclimated to simply reiterating the U.S. government line on matters of war and peace all through the Clinton era, when friendly media coverage of the Balkans and numerous other Clintonian interventions habituated the press corps to a certain mindset. By the time the Bush administration set out on a campaign of deception designed to lie us into invading and occupying Iraq, the MSM was largely reconciled to playing the role of the government's amen corner.

1. Destablises Egypt politically, one of Israel's major regional competitors2. Keeps the notion going that Muslims are so crazy they'll blow up their own3. Costs Egypt money in lost tourism revenues

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war."

Several Egyptian security experts and political analysts said that the Mossad, Israel's spy agency, was behind Saturday's attacks on the Red Sea resort of Sharm al-Sheikh.

Similar accusations were made against Israel in the past, particularly after last year's attack at the Taba Hotel in October and after the 9/11 attacks in the United States.

Saturday's pre-dawn blasts killed more than 64 people, according to Egypt's health ministry, although hospital officials put the toll as high as 88.

Many Egyptian security officials said at least one car used in the bombings had special plates indicating it had come from the Israeli border at Taba on the Sinai peninsula.

On Saturday, Egypt's state-run television interviewed retired army general Fuad Allam, who said that he was confident that Israel played a key role in Sharm al-Sheikh bombings.

Fuad also said that investigations showed that the mastermind of the Taba attack, which killed more than 34 people, was a Palestinian "apparently linked to Israel's security forces."

He added: "I'm almost certain that Israel was also behind this attack because they want to undermine our government and deal a severe blow to our economy. The only ones who benefit from these attacks are the Israelis and the Americans."

Other Egyptian political figures and prominent journalists and editors interviewed by Arabic TV channels made similar accusations.

Dia Rashwan, a political expert, said that Israel is the only country that benefits from such attacks.

Dismissing the idea that "al-Qaeda" was behind the bombings, Rashwan explained: "We are giving al- Qaeda more credit than it deserves. What happened here negates the possibility that the attacks were carried out by ordinary elements. This is the work of an extraordinary element – one that benefits from such attacks. All the available details indicate that only the Israelis could have done this."

Majdi Birnawi, another security expert, said that the Mossad was behind the attacks. "I believe that Mossad or some other [Israeli] security organization carried out this attack,"

Birnawi said he believed the Sharm el-Sheikh bombings were related to the Taba attacks, in which 12 Israelis were killed. "Everyone knows that there are no Israelis in Sharm e-Sheikh," he said.

"There are only Western tourists there. That's why it's wrong to assume that the perpetrators were targeting Israelis."

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

OK, now is this true? If it is then there is NO WAY that a bomb on a person or in a bag would cause the metal in the floor of the train to blow upwards, can't happen. So, IF this story is true then it is a smoking gun.

Cambridge Evening News

Cambridge dancer Bruce Lait has spoken of his miraculous escape when a bomb exploded just yards away from him in a Tube train carriage.

The 32-year-old was knocked out by the blast and awoke to a terrible scene of devastation in the underground tunnel near London's Aldgate East station.So lucky: Bruce recovers in hospitalMr Lait, who teaches dance in Cambridge, believes he and his dance partner Crystal Main were the only passengers in the carriage who survived the blast without serious injury - even though they were sitting nearest to where the bomb detonated.

When he came to, there was a body lying on top of him and he was surrounded by the dead and injured. But incredibly, the only wounds the dance coach sustained were facial lacerations and a perforated eardrum.

"I feel extremely, extremely lucky," he said.

The explosion happened just after Mr Lait and Ms Main, 23, got on the train at Liverpool Street on their way to the South Bank for a rehearsal.

He recalled that the carriage had about 20-25 people in it, from all walks of life, and aged from their teens to over 60.

"I remember an Asian guy, there was a white guy with tracksuit trousers and a baseball cap, and there were two old ladies sitting opposite me," he said.

"We'd been on there for a minute at most and then something happened. It was like a huge electricity surge which knocked us out and burst our eardrums. I can still hear that sound now," he said.

The impact of the blast made him pass out. As he came to, he wondered whether he was alive or dead.

"We were right in the carriage where the bomb was. I was knocked out. I did not know what was going on.

"I wondered if I was dead or not. I said to myself, you can't be dead because your brain is having conscious thoughts, so concentrate hard. I was telling myself 'wake up Bruce, wake up'."Royal visit: At Royal London HospitalDisorientated, he only gradually realised where he was and what had happened.

"When I woke up and looked around I saw darkness, smoke and wreckage. It took a while to realise where I was and what was going on, then my first concern was for Crystal.

"She was okay but she was in shock because she was trying to deal with the person on top of her who had massive head injuries. We have just found out that this person died," said Mr Lait, who lives in Suffolk.

He too was afraid to move because there was a seriously injured woman lying on top of him.

"I realised someone was lying on top of me. I tried not to move her because I didn't know if she was still alive, or I could have made it worse. This person also died, while on top of me."

At the same time, he slowly tried to work out whether he or Crystal had been injured.

"I thought if I can wiggle my toes I'm okay, and I could, and I asked Crystal to do the same."

Describing the scene as they waited for help, he said: "It was just the most awful scene of death and there were body parts everywhere. There was something next to me. I was trying not to look. I couldn't figure out what it was."

When paramedics arrived, they confirmed that the woman on top of him was dead and carefully moved her body. Mr Lait said the middle-aged woman had blonde curly hair, was dressed in black, and could have been a businesswoman.

He and Crystal were helped out of the carriage. As they made their way out, a policeman pointed out where the bomb had been. It was like a huge electricity surge which knocked us out and burst our eardrums.

Tube survivor Bruce Lait

"The policeman said 'mind that hole, that's where the bomb was'. The metal was pushed upwards as if the bomb was underneath the train. They seem to think the bomb was left in a bag, but I don't remember anybody being where the bomb was, or any bag," he said.

They were led through the tunnel to the platform at Aldgate, which was just a few hundred yards away, and taken out of the station to wait for an ambulance.

Mr Lait was taken to the Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, where he was visited by the Queen on Friday.

He said: "They asked would I mind if my name were put forward and I said I'd love to meet the Queen, even if the circumstances weren't ideal."

Sitting with his parents, Pat and Tom, Mr Lait told the Queen as she stood at his bedside: "I'm very thankful to still be here."

He said of Her Majesty: "She just seemed very nice and concerned, she seemed very genuine."

Now back at home, he has been trying to recover from the ordeal, with the help of friends and family.

Mr Lait, who teaches the Latin formation team XS, based in Cambridge, and the Cambridge Dancers' Club, said he has been moved by people's care and consideration.On the floor: Bruce & dance partner Crystal, who was also on the train"I've had people who know me phone me from all over the world and ask if I am alright. Those pictures of me and the Queen have gone all over the world."

And he said the terrible experience has given him a new outlook on life.

"It has made me realise how important life is, and that we only get one life, and we've got to be happy with what we've got in our lives."

Reflecting on the ordeal, he said: "Out of that whole carriage, I think Crystal and I were the only ones who were not seriously injured, and I think we were nearest the bomb.

"It makes me thank Him up there. I'm not overly religious but I'm not a disbeliever. I pray now and again. Something like this has just made me think, 'thank you Lord'."

A firestorm erupted amongst alternative media after this website first highlighted the inconceivable coincidence of Visor Consultants holding an exercise which centered around bombs exploding in the exact areas and at the same time as happened during the real 7/7 London Underground attack.

However, no mainstream media has reported on this massive story, instead focusing on drills that had taken place months and years before the actual event.

Until now.

British Channel 4 News has produced a special report which whitewashes the entire affair as one big coincidence and attacks this website for even questioning the unusual nature of the concurrent exercises and attacks on 7/7.

Before we offer a rebuttal to the perspective of the report, it's interesting to relate the reaction of Visor managing director when he was questioned as to the lack of mainstream media coverage on this issue.

Colman Jones, an Associate Producer on CBS:Sunday Night, met Power at a conference on disaster management in Toronto. As they were leaving the building he enquired of Power 'why there had not been more media coverage of this.' 'They were trying to keep it quiet,' Power purportedly responded, with what Jones called 'a knowing smile.'

Who is trying to keep it quiet? If this is all just hot air as Channel 4 later go on to claim, then why is it being kept secret? Why hasn't Power even revealed the name of the company he was running the drill for?

Quoting from the Channel 4 report,

Visor's crisis team, Power explained, were planning to practice the switch from what he called 'slow time' thinking to the 'quick time' thinking required by a crisis situation. In the event, they were forced to do so for real. 'Unusual though it may be to stop an exercise and go into real time,' he comments, 'it worked very well - although there were a few seconds when the audience didn't realise whether it was real or not.'

After quoting our report and Al Jazeera (who the Channel 4 writer JJ King failed to notice had just copied our article wholesale and claimed it as their own), Channel 4 claim that this website engaged in 'careless speculation' in that we failed to contact Visor.

All we were doing is drawing attention to the comments that Power had made on both BBC Radio 5 and ITN News. Furthermore, Power refused to respond to anyone who wasn't what he called 'accredited media' - and just sent the same template stock e mail out to anyone who enquired about the drill.

Channel 4 and JJ King then state,

In fact, the 'exercises' he spoke of on Five Live were carried out purely 'on paper', or at least PowerPoint, by a small group of seven or eight executives (Power remains tight-lipped about the client) seeking to examine the impact on corporate decision-making of a potential crisis situation.

OK, let's take a step back here.

Channel 4 quoted Power earlier as saying that when the real attack began, th exercise switched from 'slow time' to 'quick time' thinking and that Visor stopped the exercise and went into 'real time'. This, coupled with comments previously made by Power, suggests that Visor had some kind of actie role in the command structure in dealing with the management of the crisis, the real attack. How can the exercise have just been paper based when Visor started managing the real attack, not the scripted one, after it happened.

Even putting this aside for a moment, the drill need not have any link whatsoever to the attack as it unfolded, but still could have been cited by the government as a fallback excuse had any of their operatives been caught in the act of facilitating the bombings. This was the point of our original article and we made it clear that Visor and Peter Power could have been completely unwitting dupes in this process. In fact that would have been the favourable because it reduces the chance of good people stepping forward and blowing the whistle.

In the light of a brief interview with Power, the 'unbelievable' coincidence of events suddenly seems entirely comprehensible: the train stations targeted, after all, were all in central London -- any planner would pick these amongst a list of possible targets.

Take a look at a map of the tube stations. Factor in the amount of different stations with the fact that the exercises targeted the exact same stations at the exact same time as the real event happened.

Then consider the fact that the exercises planned simultaneous bombs going off in different stations. The fact that the 7/7 attacks were simultaneous bombs only emerged two days after the event, making the coincidence theory even less plausible.

One individual calculated the likelihood of this being just a coincidence. The odds were one in 3,715,592,613,265,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. This is obviously a figure open to conjecture but it gives you an idea of the ballpark improbability we are talking about.

Channel 4 cite poison gas attack drills on the Underground and a BBC documentary which dramatised an attack on the Underground as proof that the Visor drill was very much part of a trend and nothing more than a coincidence. This misses the point entirely.

Again we have to repeat, the key elements of the Visor drill are that the exact same locations were targeted at the exact same time as the real attack. This is beyond coincidence. We are aware that there were other drills and the mainstream media has covered them over and over again. Why haven't they covered this one?

The group in question was Abu Hafs al Masri Brigade. Previous investigations by the Boston Globe and others concur that this group doesn't exist and is likely to be one man sat at a computer.

So how can Sky News might as well have reported that Intergalactic Imperial Reptoids claimed responsibility for the attack, and yet it is the alternative media that consistently gets lambasted for bad journalism?

The tide is turning, newspaper sales are down, TV news viewers are falling. The mainstream media has lost all credibility and people are turning to those who actively seek the truth rather than actively seek to suppress it.

Even in the face of this barrage from both sloppily researched 'special reports' and government hackers trying to shut our websites down, we will continue to cover the events in London with a skeptical eye. In fact the more we are attacked, the more we will re-double our efforts to reach more people.

The truth will always triumph over the scoffing sardonic whims of establishment media news whores.

I think it's more likely that this was the Mossad (or a dark and disturbed faction within the Mossad) than it was anyone else. Israel gets its clash of civilisations and can use it as an excuse to further oppress the Palestinians. I think it was a French politician who referred to Israel as "that shitty little country" - spot on mate!

Gilad Atzmon, a London based musician and friend of Israel Shamir, has communicated this via email to some friends:

...The conclusion we can draw is clear. The real perpetrators of the underground bombing are still free, they are out there and they may attack again, but then who could they be?

It is very difficult to determine. Blair is trying to tell us that they must be Muslim fundamentalists, but in fact they can as well be just Arab nationalists. Thinking about it, isn't it fathomable that they could be far right British nationalists? The BNP was the first to say "didn't we warn you all about those Muslims?" But it goes further, as many informal commentators mentioned, we shouldn't exclude the possibility that some foreign intelligence services may be involved. Both Mossad and CIA are reasonable candidates. In the course of the years, Mossad made itself some serious reputation for its "false flag" operations. Why would the Mossad be interested in such a kill? Just because Zionism benefits from the emergence of the alleged "cultural clash" between the so-called "Judeo Christian" world and the Muslim one.

Cyte says: Good. Let's start talking about it. Maybe other non-Zionist Jews would be equally or even more forthcoming. Where are the whistleblowers when a confused world needs them?

Friday, 22 July 2005

This is more like an execution than the actions of the police. Why manhandle him to the ground if he's going to blow himself up, why not shoot him in the head like they're trained to do? Why 5 shots after they already seem to have him restrained? This feels like another Oswald/Ruby moment...

A man has been shot dead by armed officers at Stockwell Tube station, as police hunt four would-be bombers.

Passenger Mark Whitby told BBC News he had seen a man of Asian appearance shot five times by "plain-clothes police officers" with a handgun.

"I saw the gun being fired five times into the guy - he is dead," he said.

Passengers were evacuated from the Northern Line station in south London. The incident followed four minor explosions in the capital on Thursday.

Police have cordoned off a 200-metre area around Stockwell station.

Services on the Victoria and Northern lines have been suspended following a request by the police, London Underground said.

Ambulances including an air ambulance have been sent to the scene at Stockwell.

"I saw an Asian guy run onto the train hotly pursued by three plain-clothes police officers.

"One of them was carrying a black handgun - it looked like an automatic - they pushed him to the floor, bundled on top of him and unloaded five shots into him."

Passenger Alison Bowditch told BBC News: "The tube pulled into the station and we were sitting there, you know, as you do and then there was just a lot of shouting and the sound of gunfire and then people were saying, 'Get off, get off!'

"Somebody definitely went to the ground and as they went to the ground I heard gun fire and assumed they had been shot."

A tell-tale sign of Illuminati handiwork in the London bombings. Forget about the Muslims, this is about things that are MUCH larger than that. You are being lied to, wake the fuck up!

by Mike Whitney

Two days before the London subway bombings, Fed-Master Alan Greenspan flushed nearly $40 billion in liquidity into financial markets. The sudden activity was an astonishing departure from the current policy of tightening interest rates to stifle inflation. The Chairman has not explained his erratic behavior, but there’s growing speculation that Greenspan may have had information about the likelihood of terrorist attacks and decided to “preemptively” head-off a run on the markets. As it turns out, his actions may have been a positive factor in stabilizing the market following the incident, (check: The Cunning Realist; “following the money” for more on the Fed’s unusual action but that doesn’t address the larger issue of whether Greenspan had inside information that an attack was imminent.

Many people are unaware that the Federal Reserve gets information directly from the CIA. Perhaps, the level of “chatter” was sufficiently high to warrant the extraordinary measures. (“The Fed almost doubled its temporary pool in just a few days!”) That doesn’t explain, however, why alarms were not raised in England. In fact, as Democracy Now reported on July 19, “London lowered the security threat just before the July 7 bombings”.

Why?

The details now surfacing about the London bombings are familiar to those who have researched the anomalies surrounding September 11. In both cases the government version of events is shot with holes.

“Israel Insider” cites Mossad Chief Meir Dagan, in an interview with the German Newspaper Bild am Sonntag:“The Mossad office in London received advance notice about the attacks, but only six minutes before the first blast, the paper reports, confirming an earlier AP report. As a result, it was impossible to take any action to prevent the blasts.”

So, at the very least we have confirmation that Israeli Intelligence had some advance warning of the attacks. But, the Mossad’s announcement doesn’t square with other reports on the same day.

Just hours after the July 7 attacks, the Stratfor Intelligence Agency published an article “Israel warned United Kingdom of Possible Attacks” on antiwar.com that stated, “Israel warned London of the attacks a ‘couple of days ago,’ but British authorities failed to respond accordingly to deter the attacks” and “While Israel is keeping quiet for the time-being, British Prime Minister Tony Blair soon will be facing the heat for his failure to take action.”

The article concludes on a somber note, “The British government sat on this information for days and failed to respond. Though the Israeli government is playing along publicly, it may not stay quiet for long. This is sure to apply pressure on Blair very soon for his failure to deter this major terrorist attack.”

The Stratfor report has gotten little attention from anyone except conspiracy theorists, but it is likely to resurface in connection to Greenspan’s inexplicable behavior and as the official story upheld by Blair and co. continues to melt-down under greater scrutiny.

The Blair narrative has taken full advantage of the “evil ideology” theory of terror and completely eschews the facts as they dribble in from the police investigation. At FOX News the government approach was clear from the very onset; they believed that the attacks were the work of suicide bombers, a theory that promotes the racial-stereotypes that appeal to FOX viewers. From the FOX perspective, this justifies pushing through Blair’s new regressive legislation, savaging civil liberties, and pursuing an endless war against Islamic extremism. Blair’s posturing has followed the speculative analysis of FOX in nearly every respect. Armed with nothing more than over-heated rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims, Blair has framed the bombings as an attack on “our way of life”; a spurious charge intended to fuel the public rage and incite violence against immigrants.

The fact that the “alleged” terrorists bought round-trip subway tickets, placed a “Park-n-Ride” ticket in the window of their car at the station, and didn’t strap the bombs to their bodies, has increased suspicion that the government’s story may veer substantially from the truth.

One of the suspects actually stayed out partying late the night before. Is that what one would expect on the last day of one’s life?Another has an 18 month old baby, and still another had a baby on the way.Men don’t commit suicide when they have kids on the way, despite Mr. Blair’s impassioned rhetoric. So far, the government version is laced with inaccuracies; a hopeless tangle of loose-ends, spurious allegations and blatant propaganda.

The myriad unanswered questions about the bombings suggest that we should reserve judgment about the real culprits before further investigation. Like 9-11, a disturbing pattern seems to be emerging of government officials manipulating public fear to advance their domestic policies and press-ahead with the war agenda. It’s easy to wonder about the real source of these terror-incidents when they always seem to benefit the same class of characters.As the details leak out and drips and drabs, no one will be too surprised if the unanswered questions, misleading information and barefaced lies contradict the feeble demagoguery issuing from 10 Downing Street.

The Blair-Bush-Greenspan cabal may not have known it was “bombs-away” for poor London, but it is apparent that they knew a lot more than they are letting on. The primary tools of empire, fear and deception, are being invoked with ever-increasing precision and their manipulation is having a devastating effect on democratic institutions and global security. The only ones who continue to gain are the privileged few at the top of the political and economic pyramid.

Whenever any high-profile, violent event occurs - whether it be the assassination of some important politician, an unexpected conflict, or a sudden, devastating act of terrorisim - everyone immediately wants to know its causes, key players, and consequences. The problems occur for those needing to react or those just seeking to understand because they bring to the process too much conceptual baggage they have amased along the way, and take too many short cuts in seeking solutions. Despite what counterterrorist experts claim about wanting to make what they are doing predictable - some kind of science - almost all these events are highly individualistic ones because of the specific context in which they occur, the unexpected action by some previously uninvolved party, and the most likely occurrence of some mistake or oversight along the way.

In today's world of asymetric warfare, actions come so thick and fast that we have developed abbreviations to denote them - like 9/11, 3/11 and 7/7 - as if they were as common as neighborhood dispensers of modern man's essentials - and all kinds of items - acronyms, abbreviations, tradecraft, jargon, new facts, speculation and the like - are used to describe and define them. Then all observers bring to their tasks all kinds of assumptions and biases which both shape and distort what they have been trying to understand and explain. It is apparetnly the only way we can keep from going completely mad and impotent in today's unpredictable, violent world.

One only has to look at any day's headlines to see what this approach to events produces in the way of content and understanding: "Youths Lost to Islam Became 'Suicide' Bombers in London", "9/11 Attacks Were Inside Jobs", "Dr. Kelly Killed Himself", "Mossad Pulls Off Another False Flag Operation in Gaza", "Al-Qaeda Strikes Gold Again", "House Inquiry Reconfirms Oswald JFK's Assassin", "FRU Refuses to Come Clean about 'Psyops' in Ulster", "KGB Planned to KillPolitician in Scandinavian False Flag Move", "Mossad Had Most to Gain in Attacks of 9/11", and the like.

The trouble with such articles is that they are based upon a level of information, prejudice, and uncertainty which would not be permitted in other stories. All these incidents involved governments whose security services must be protected at all costs, so information is onlydisclosed or leaked which helps promote explanations which serve their interests. The services of other governments give a wide berth to the process in order to receive the same privilege when they are in center stage though all the world's leading security services are intimately involved in all kinds of ways when anything important happens. As a result, claims of incompetence, corruption, and bad luck by officials are very much at a premium in explanations. It is the culprits who are usually guilty of oversights, manipulation, and good fortune in such accounts.

As a result, the mainstream media generally discuss such events as tragedies, surprises, and accidents while sites on the internet are prone to see them as the result of conspiracies. Actually, they are usually the result of cock-ups by authorities, plans or counterterrorist operations which have gone wrong because of blunders. Even when deadly conspiracies are plotted, they generally go astray even if they are carried out by official agencies because of some oversight, accident, or more pressing matter. In sum, the suspicion that conspiracies have occurred should be the last option that officials and their critics resort to rather than the first when such events occur.

Having followed this advice in examining the underground and bus bombings in London on July 7th, I have come to the conclusion that it is one of the best examples of a conspiracy conceived, and carried out in a long time - or, if you prefer, Britain's counterterrorists effected one of the biggest cock-ups of all times. Conspiracies and cock-ups are inversely proportional except when some plot is prevented, and the concepts can be used to calculate the performance of either the terrorists or the counterterrorists. In this case, the Leeds sleeper cell must be given total marks, and their protagonists among the authorities virtually nothing.

To understand why Britain's counterterrorists did so badly, one must go back to the end of the Cold War when MI5 aka Security Service - unlike what was happening to the FBI in the States - was given new powers, personnel, and privileges to combat the terrorists, especially the Provisional IRA, in Northern Ireland. In 1993, MI5's new T Branch was given overall control of the kingdon's counterterrorism efforts, much to the expense and chagrin of Scotland Yard's Anti-Terrorist Unit aka SO-13, and the Royal Ulster Constabulary's Special Branch. Whitehall wanted results in combating the Provos, and was not too worried about legal niceities along the way, providing that it only had to answer to the Home Secretary for its performance.

And the changes did not come a minute too soon as the PIRA was in the midst of its most deadly bombing campaign ever throughout the kingdom. Its temporary ceasefire in December 1990 after Mrs. Thatcher stepped down as Prime Minister was not followed by the expected permanent one but a renewed campaign of terror when the UK could least afford it because of its involvement in the Gulf War. On February 7, 1991, the Provos fired three mortar rounds at No. 10 Downing Street -reminiscent of how it had obliterated the Newry Police Station, and nearly killed the former PM back in the mid-1980s -setting off a wave of tit-for-tat killings between republicans and loyalists which would only end when the Provisionals declared a "complete cessation of military operations" on August 31, 1994.

During the bombing campaign, Sinn Fein and the PIRA Council were badly divided over its conduct. While SF leaders Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness were talking to MI6's Michael Oatley in the hope of establishing real peace, the Council, especially Sean Kelly, was most desirous of pressing ahead with the war. The bombing in London's Soho, Oxford Street, and the Baltic Exchange, the Warrington Gas Works, its shopping centre, the City of London's NatWest Tower, St. Ethelburga's Church in Bishopsgate, six no-warning bombs in North London, and many others seemed to be Kelly's handiwork, and little wonder that T Branch was most desirous of catching him red-handed - what could only be achieved by penetrating the PIRA Council back in Belfast.

At the same time, Special Branch officials back in Northern Ireland, especially those in the Stevens Inquiry investigating British collusion by the Army's Force Research Unit (FRU) in sectarian murders, were finally regaining control of the spiraling terror by getting the Ulster Defence Association's Johnny 'Mad Dog' Adair, commander of its 'C' Company aka Ulster Freedom Fighters (UFF) in the Shankill Road, to resume its dirty work for it. (For more on this, see my article "Just Who Is Lord Stevens of Kirkwhelpington?") While UDA's intelligence chief Brian Nelson was being scapegoated for all the killings in which the FRU participated, and UDA members, especially John Gregg, who wanted to kill Sinn Fein leaders seeking a peaceful settlement were being imprisoned, Adair's assassins so attacked innocent Catholics in West Belfast that the PIRA Council had to increase its efforts to protect Catholics back home, operations at the expense of the bombing campaign on the mainland.

After five unsuccessful attempts to assassinate Adair, the UFF, RUC, and some of Stevens' people were finally able to take Kelly's measure. With a meeting of Adair's people scheduled on October 23, 1993 in his office above Frizzell's fish shop on the Shankill Road - though the personnel prudently were advised to stay away in case there were any unexpected fireworks - Kelly and Thomas Begley walked into the shop, dressed in white coats to make it appear that they were making a delivery, with a time-fused bomb, set to destroy the above office, after they had given a warning, and everyone had made their escape. Unfortunately, the bomb exploded while still in Begley's possession, killing him and nine others when the building collapsed.

The massacre, especially after Adair committed one of his own in retaliation, was a great boost to the peace process, and a big set-back for Kelly and his bombing campaign. While Kelly received nine life sentences for his blunder - something he accepted would make him be seen as a terrorist for the rest of his life - the British and Irish government soon agreed to the 'Downing Street Declaration' which established the principles for the making of a settlement, and the Provisional's ceasefire followed. It was then basically a question of making it permanent, with the PIRA decommissioning its weapons, and joining the peace process.

The only problem is that the Provisionals never followed through, and Steven, though ultimately the Met's Chief Commissioner, especially since his immediate subordinate Hugh Orde was now head of the province's new police force, the PSNI, never lost sight of it - particularly now that Kelly and Adair had both been released from prison under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.According to Sir John, Kelly was constantly looking for the right opportunity to resume his paramilitary career, especially his bombings. "With the IRA ceasefire," Mark Urban wrote in UK Eyes Alpha, "some senior policeman began to worry that the Security Service would now be searxching for new territories to conquer." (p. 281) Stevens was dedicated to making sure that it did not happen.

Consequently, while a series of operations were occurring to make the Provisionals finally decommission their heavy weapons and come to the peace table - the alleged PIRA spying ring at Stormont Castle after provincial government had finally been restored, their alleged raid on the files at the Castlereagh police headquarters in East Belfast on St. Patrick's Day, 2002, and the Northern Bank raid around Christmas, 2004 - British police, especially the Met, made sure that MI5's efforts in countering international terrorism, G Branch's responsibility, always had a domestic, hopefully Ulster, component.

When British subjects Asif Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif went to the Occupied Territories in late 2003, and blew themselves up in Mike's Bar in Tel Aviv, killing and wounding several Israelis, Stevens and other senior policemen were immediately reminded of what Kelly and Begley had accomplised in Frizzell's fish shop a decade before, and worried about what this indicated for the future, particularly in light of the domestic feedback the war on terror was creating. This was after T Branch had made a complete cock-up out of what psychopath Kamel Bourgoss, an asylum seeker from Algeria, was attempting in his Manchester flat - what it claimed was a laboratory site of a ricin-based WMD attack but turned out to be, after a massive roundup of would-be terrorists, only the murder site of Special Branch detective Stephen Oake.

To get G Branch interested in the domestic dimension of its pursuits, T Branch, thanks to apparent input from the Met, then tried to make out that Muslims youths at the PC UK Internet Cafe in Crawley were part of an international conspiracy which was circling the world (Operation Crevis). The plot concerned the "Portland Seven", especially Haroon Rashid Aswat, wanting to go to Pakistan so that they could make contact with Al-Qaeda in order to fight for it in Afghanistan; the buying of a large amount of fertilizer which could be made into bombs, and the storing of it near Heathrow by alleged Canadian terrorist Mohammad Monim Khajawa; the recuitment of Muslim youth, and then sending them to Afghanistan for terrorist training by fiery Muslim radical Abu Qatada, close associate of his counterpart in Spain, Abu Dahdah; and many of the youth who frequented the Crawley cafe. This started in November 2003, just after Jeffrey Leon Battle had been sentenced in Portland to 18 years in prison for trying to fight for foreign terrorists. (For more on this, see my article "War on Terror Sucks More Still" in the Trowbridge Archive.)

The plot turned out to be a utter fiasco, given the fact that it just diverted international counterterrorists away from what Al-Qaeda was plotting in Madrid on March 11, 2004. Still, G Branch, especially agent 'Gould', tried to reclaim something from it by getting the youths - Jawad Akbar, Omar Khjam, Anthony Garcia, and several others - to flee to Pakistam as if they were guilty of something. Stevens joined the call by shouting out to all who would listen that a domestic terrorist attack was not a question of if but when. The FBI did what it could by trying to connect Portland lawyer Brandon Mayfield to 3/11. Unfortunately for G Branch, the Met, and the Bureau, none of it worked, as the youths stayed put and avoided indictments, as did Khajawa and Mayfield.

The trouble with this domestic overkill over the issue of domestic, Muslim terrorism was the terrible blowback it created. Some Muslim youths became convinced that the security authorities were dedicated to proving, one way or another, that they were domestic terrorists. This gave them a calling that they had never had before - what became ever more attractive as the illegitimate invasion of Iraq turned into a civil war which could promote the expelling of the West from the Middle East. Stevens' shouts became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In this context, Mohammad Sidique Khan, a friend of one of the Luton youths arrested during Operation Crevis, put togther a conspiracy which would give the Met Commissioner and his colleagues all they bargained for, and more. Khan, after recruiting Shehzad Tanweer, Hasib Hussain, and Germaine Lindsay to join the operation, put together a plan which would supply them with everything they needed for a suicide mission while betraying nothing which would elicit any suspicion of them or it. Their families even had no idea as to what they were up to, as they never discussed anything with them, or conducted any necessary acts anywhere near them. They observed a tradecraft which the Agency and SIS have rarely, if ever, emulated. It was something the MOSSAD would be proud of.

After visits to Israel and Pakistan to determine just how bad the plight of Muslims is, and the apparent merits of such a plot, Khan's group decided upon a London attack while a G8 meeting was taking place in Edinburgh. The timing seemed ideal because the Joint Terrorist Analysis Center had just agreed to reducing the threat level of terrorism from "severe" to "substantial", though it added, to please the just-retired Met Commissioner apparently, that the threat of a domestic terrorist attack was growing because of the occupation of Iraq.

It assumed that domestic Muslim terrorists, some 200 according to Stevens, still did not have the means of carrying out their designs. To make sure of this, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Peter Hain ordered on June 20th the reimprisonment of Kelly because of his alleged resumption of terrorist activities, thanks to advice provided by Stevens' closest police associate, PSNI Commissioner Orde, though no details were given to justify the action. Counter terrorist officials were apparently convinced that Kelly was the most likely supplier of what potential Muslim terrorists needed, and with him being back in prison, it would not happen.

7/11 proved them totally wrong. The four suicide bombers followed a most carefully thought-out plan down to the last detail. Setting out from home as if they only intended to spend the day in the capital - what required no tearful, revealing good-byes - they then joined up at Luton where they picked up their backpack bombs which had probably been put together in a car-rental vehicle which they duly paid the parking fee for before embarking. They wanted to make sure that no possible surveillance would spot any irregularity, and inspect it. They bought return tickets in order to prevent similar suspicion and inquiries.

Once they reached London - at the lowest state of alert in a long time, thanks to the G8 summit, a terror alert exercise in the underground which would inconvenience the least amount of people, and the counterterrorists most concerned about keeping Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu informed of rather than the general public - the suicide bombers had a cakewalk in the capital. The exercise, unlike the ones NORAD was conducting during the 9/11 attacks to steal a march on the would-be highjackers, was just a coincidence.

The simultaneous explosions in the underground made up for the fact that not more people were killed and injured. Under the circumstances, 55 persons killed would be almost as effective as killing 3,000. And they did not shout Muslim oaths when they set off the bombs only to embarrass counterterrorist officials more when their true identities were discovered at the site because of the papers and plastic they carried with them - what are the least likely items destroyed in explosions. The later blast on the bus, intended just to spread more panic, proved successful, though Germaine Lindsay may have been rushed into setting it off prematurely for fear that he was being discovered, and stopped. His was apparently intended for the rescue teams making their way to the victims at King's Cross.

When the full extent of the conspiracy was revealed, all the counterterrorists could do was to plead surprise, and grab for straws - try to hook up an Egyptian biochemist who returned to Cairo as the plot's mastermind, see that Pakistani authorities finally arrested Haroon Rashid Aswat in the hope that he could be fitted out for the role, and now, it seems, re-stage underground attacks at Shepherd's Bush, Warren Street, and Oval Stations, and on a No. 26 bus at Hackney Road in minute miniature to keep the plan of making the best out of a terrible situation going. In sum, the answer to a dreadful conspiracy by your worst enemies is a most devious one of your own.

Today is the last day of parliament before an 80 day break. So if the governmen wanted to get those anti-terror measures through which were proposed after the 7/7 bombing, then this status of high alert is the perfect climate to get them rammed through without dissent.

Sky News reported that members of parliament could be recalled tonight in a special session for the express purpose of passing that legislation.

And what does the legislation include? Designating anyone who writes articles or puts out a website that advocates or gives aid and comfort to the terrorists.

So you have a situation whereby they could say that someone like myself writing articles accusing the government of involvement, has a negative impact on the public’s trust of the government in fighting the war on terror and therefore aids the terrorists.

The definition is so loose that they could classify what we do on this website as aiding terrorists.

When of course all we’re really doing is shining a spotlight on the real terrorists and attempting to save both lives and liberties.

The government is setting up a database of undersirables to be watched under this legislation.

In the early confusion about what is actually happening in London, several things are already clear.

- This immediately stalls questions about the first bombing. The mainstream media were finally beginning to highlight the fact that the government's official story did not fit together. This takes those issues off the front pages.

- This further promulgates the fearmongering and creates a pliable public that is willing to accept draconian anti-terror laws. They are trying to turn us into Israel, with an alert or a bombing every fortnight.

- On the very day that the Patriot Act is due to be renewed, Bush can use the alert level to grease the skids and bully Congress into re-authorizing the bill.

Related: Bush sees London attacks as reason for Patriot Act

Some early reports from the scene of the incidents are very interesting.

Reports are that Arabs were seen running from the sitesof the explosion. London's population is 20% Arab. If a bomb exploded near you, would you run? One of the Arabs is reported as saying "what is wrong with these people?" which suggests he was just scared but was immediately identified as a scapegoat.

Sky News is showing scenes of random Arabs being arrested. Watch for the fearmongering of 'four terrorists on the loose waiting to attack' - this will enable emergency stop and search powers to be used. How likely is it that all four bombs would fail to detonate?

ITN news reported that one of the suspected suicide bombers was arrested and taken into Whitehall. Why would somebody so potentially dangerous be taken into a government building and not to the police station?

Sky News reported that 'something was in the air' and that several stations had been closed due to an alert at 11am.

BBC reported that one of the individuals' rucksacks exploded and he looked surprised and dismayed. Who is planting these devices in people's luggage? Or are these people copycats?

Sky News reported that Tony Blair was already in a crisis meeting in an underground bunker which overlapped with the alert. Another case of preparing to 'control' the chaos as it unfolded?

Sky News also reports Blair was set to meet with MI5 and MI6 as well as Secret Service later today. This suggests Blair's schedule was planned ahead of time to coincide with these incidents.

There are already 'Atta passport' type stories of Arabs planting the bombs and running away and being chased by members of the public. This immediately creates the psy-ops stroyboard that this is the work of Al-Qaeda.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard defends his country's policies in Iraq and Afghanistan by citing the so-called claim of responsibility for the London bombings which was carried on an internet forum, which criticized Australian involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. The original claim was of course proven to be a hoax.

The Israeli government is renowned for pulling off these dummy bombings to keep their population in a state of fear.

Thursday, 21 July 2005

Breaking news in London, everything is still very unclear at the moment. Police are saying they're not treating it as a "major" incident but I guess they don't know anything either at the moment.

LONDON (AFP) - Three London subway stations were evacuated following a number of unspecified "incidents," police said, as witnessses reported panic and screaming in the Underground system.

There were no immediate reports of casualties.

Services on the Victoria and Northern lines were suspended.

"I was in the carriage and we smelt smoke -- it was like something was burning," said Sosiane Mohellavi, 35, was travelling from Oxford Circus to Walthamstow when she was evacuated from a train at Warren Street.

"Everyone was panicked and people were screaming. We had to pull the alarm. I am still shaking," she told Britain's domestic Press Association.

"We pulled into Warren Street and were evacuated. It was horrible," she said.

Passengers at Warren Street, one of the affected stations in the north of the British capital, reported seeing smoke but the police were unable to confirm this.

"Emergency services personnel are responding to reports of incidents at three locations on the Underground - the Oval (to the south), Warren Street and Shepherd's Bush (to the west)," said a spokeswoman for Scotland Yard.

The alert came exactly two weeks after the London bombings that killed 52 people and four suspected suicide bombers.

A Sky reporter at the scene of one of the stations reported seeing dozens of fire engines and police vehicles. There were also reports that buildings around Oval station had been evacuated.

At long last, Plamegate -- the scandal surrounding the outing of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson by two "senior administration officials" -- has exploded out of the D.C. beltway to become a major national news story.

It would appear that this scandal goes way beyond Karl Rove and who said what to whom when about Ms. Plame. It certainly is true, though, that turning over that slimy Rove-Plame rock was the way into the larger issues upon which Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald and his grand jury apparently are focusing.

(Ain't it almost always so in Washington? The cover-up is always a greater problem for the perpetrators than the original crime, for inevitably even seamier scandals are unearthed one by one; see the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, Iran-Contra, et al. The moral lesson -- admit your mistake early, bear the immediate hit, and move on unencumbered -- rarely seems to "take" among politicians, of whatever party.)

What's being covered up in the Plame/Rove case seems to revolve around the Bush Administration's orchestrated, and perhaps illegal, propaganda campaign to justify its invasion of Iraq. Valerie Plame and her husband Ambassador Joseph Wilson -- who wrote the op-ed in the New York Times that got this whole thing going -- are just the tips of very large icebergs, and one of those icebergs has a name: the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), which we'll examine below.

One of the ruling judges on the case of the two reporters who refused to divulge their Plame-outing source was about to go easy on them when he read Fitzgerald's new information -- eight pages of which were redacted from the public -- and said that the national-security seriousness of what he read changed his mind. The court then ordered Time's Matthew Cooper and the New York Times' Judith Miller to testify or else; Cooper finally did, and Miller is in jail for contempt of court.

We don't know what is in those eight blacked-out pages -- and, if they really do involve national-security matters, we may never be permitted to know precisely. But apparently they provide the locus around which Fitzgerald is building a case that could result in perjury indictments, at the least, for a number of Administration officials and perhaps journalists as well.

(Another judge said that the prosecutor's classified filing -- those missing eight pages -- "decides the case." In other words, to quote Lawrence O'Donnell: "All the judges who have seen the prosecutors secret evidence firmly believe he is pursuing a very serious crime, and they have done everything they can to help him get an indictment.")

Further, depending on what Bush and Cheney knew and when they knew it -- and what they did or covered-up in the possible light of such knowledge -- there may be plenty of ammunition for likely impeachment hearings. (Note: Bush hired a private attorney last summer for this CIA-leak case. )

And the two journalists in question, Cooper and Miller, have their own attorneys. It's defense-attorney heaven in the nation's capital these days.

Enlightenment

Do you feel like you're living in some Orwellian nightmare? Or perhaps you feel as if you're plugged into The Matrix? Well if so, you've come to the right place. No matter how messed up you thought the world was, by the time you've finished reading some of the things I've found on my travels in Cyberspace you'll realise that 1984 was just a typo!

A note to the non-ravers out there: codshit is
NOT a derogatory or insulting term and bears no relation in offensiveness to its four-letter cousin, it's a word used to describe the nonsense that people sometimes talk when they are off their heads. To understand what codshit is watch the film Human Traffic.

Comments are welcome, but before you waste perfectly useful energy abusing me please take a moment to reflect on the basic right we all have to express ourselves!

Please remember that I am not telling you what to think or believe, take everything you read here with a large grain of salt!

Wisdom

If you confront the Universe with good intentions in your heart it will reflect that and reward your intent... usually... It just doesn't always do it in the way you expect.
.: G'kar :.

So there, we have figured it out, go back to bed America, your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed America, your government is in control again. Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up. Go back to bed America, here's American Gladiators. Here's 56 channels of it. Watch these pituitary retards bang their fuckin skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom. Here you go America, you are free... to do as we tell you.
.: Bill Hicks :.

Let there be no doubt that the people of the free world are engaged in a war... In the next few years, we are either going to see the people of the free world rise up against these fascists, now setting the stage for global war, or we are going to see the end of democracy as we know it with martial law the end result.
.: David Shayler :.

Nothing will end war unless the people themselves refuse to go to war.
.: Albert Einstein :.